Mike, The provisions of 2257 that I find concerning and potentially relevant in the present case are (h)(2)(a)(iii) and (f)(4).
(h)(2)(a)(iii) defines producing as uploading a picture, which appears to mean that uploaders must keep records for their photographs. It also appears that the legislative intent was for the record statement to be affixed to the material in question, something that isn't currently happening. This is stressed in (f)(4), which makes it unlawful to use any material without the requisite notice affixed to it. I suspect that the Foundation isn't liable here in cases where it has not been made aware of potential violations. Section 230 probably applies up to the point where the Foundation refuses to take appropriate action. I'm not a lawyer though, so I might be wrong here. What do you think? Geoffrey Plourde ________________________________ From: Mike Godwin <mnemo...@gmail.com> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, May 21, 2010 7:13:18 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Legal requirements for sexual content -- help, please! Stillwater Rising writes: Hosting these images without 18 USC 2257(A) records, in my opinion, is a * > no-win* situation for everyone involved. > This raises the obvious question of how you interpret 18 USC 2257A(g), which refers back to 18 USC 2257(h) (including in particular 18 USC 2257(h)(2)(B)). I'll be interested in hearing your thoughts about the interaction and interpretation of these related statutes (as well as of the interaction between 18 USC 2257(h) generally and 47 USC 230 and 231, referenced within section 2257. --Mike _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
